For the Anti-RTW folks.

[SemperFiUSMC]

I don"t feel anyone is supposed to provide me with a job. I have a job b/c i am an all american badass at what I do

I am not really understanding the property owner question. I do own a house
If you are referring to unions bargaining with a company over labor then I generally look at it the same as i do our laws. We don't break the laws that mandate us, but they are in place as a reminder or a form of sub conscious control. I feel the union is a subtle reminder to the companies to do what's right. I know ,i know some unions abuse their position merely to impose their will at times. It is just I witness a balance of union and non-union working together everyday. Our company uses tons of non-union labor to complete jobs everyday and there is none of the alleged violence and hatred. I just don't think that the interpretation that a majority of the posters express about unions is accurate. They wonder why union members get defensive and in the same breath label them as a bunch of slobs and free loaders. I never see any posts on INGO about the SCABS kill another coworker, or non-union violence, etc etc etc. Why are so many members so focused on expressing their negative images of unions when generally union people could give 2 about what non-union is doing. Half the people that comment in these probably can't even spell union let alone tell you a lick of labor history. I just wish people would take into consideration the individuals instead of trying to form an opinion based on the UAW's image.

So you think it's OK for unions to exert "sub conscious control" to force a company "to do what's right"? I don't have to get any further than that. As the representatives of the company's property owner, why does management have to have a "subtle reminder to the companies to do what's right" and what right do you as a worker have to provide it?

 

[Sigasaurus]

I never have clarified my stance in whole. Maybe this will help.

I do not believe that unions should be granted any exclusive rights.

I feel that if a company chooses to negotiate a forced union hiring clause in a contract during negotiations then that is their right.

I support prevailing wage and the fair wage act of 1935 : My logic is that it prevents some rinky dink company from low balling a bid and then hiring a bunch of unskilled goons to man a major project. Look at Gaylor Electric, he has no problem competing with union labor and he is a great man to work for. Trained drug free employees with tons of equipment and the proper insurance.

I do not feel that some unions take the appropriate stance as far as wages vs skills. Common sense tells me that nobody should make $30 an hour to put in a bolt.

I believe that existing unions current contracts should be grandfathered in should "Right to Work" be voted in.

I will be the first to admit that a majority of unions could use a huge reality check and at times they ditch reality in the name of "Don't tread on me". The only thing that I ask is people curb their criticism and rude remarks when speaking of union members. Not all unions are bad and the majority of the people involved are good and honest people.

 

[Sigasaurus]

So you think it's OK for unions to exert "sub conscious control" to force a company "to do what's right"? I don't have to get any further than that. As the representatives of the company's property owner, why does management have to have a "subtle reminder to the companies to do what's right" and what right do you as a worker have to provide it?

Yes I do about as much as I think it is right for a company to deny a valued employee a raise or benefits just because they know the individual can't quit. In a perfect world unions would not exist. Greed created unions and it will also be the death of them. The world moves in cycles and maybe it is time for them to go, but rest assured they will return in due time.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Yes I do about as much as I think it is right for a company to deny a valued employee a raise or benefits just because they know the individual can't quit. In a perfect world unions would not exist. Greed created unions and it will also be the death of them. The world moves in cycles and maybe it is time for them to go, but rest assured they will return in due time.

If the employee is valued why wouldn't an employer give them a raise, regardless of whether they would leave or not? If they didn't give them a raise, doesn't that emply that they weren't in fact valued? And why should your mobilty (or lack thereof) have any bearing whatsoever on what your employer chooses (or not) to compensate you?

 

[Sigasaurus]

If the employee is valued why wouldn't an employer give them a raise, regardless of whether they would leave or not? If they didn't give them a raise, doesn't that emply that they weren't in fact valued? And why should your mobilty (or lack thereof) have any bearing whatsoever on what your employer chooses (or not) to compensate you?

Your views rely on individuals doing what is right. In a perfect world all would be good, but it is a fact companies will let their employees live in poverty in the name of profit. This holds true in all aspects of life and government. When companies stop valuing their employees then what options do they have. Your response is quit and find a new job? So what does a 50+ year old man do in this situation?

 

[sbsg2005]

In a perfect world large corperations would not exist, unions would not exist, and I would be able to buy a stanley thermos that is made in america. How ever that is not the case, companies got bigger, greedier and started cutting corners in every aspect. As a result people formed unions for reasons ranging from saftey to retirement. Then the unions got greedy and companies got greedier. As a result companies started moving overseas were they could cut corners and compromise the workers saftey, health and quality of life with little to no coniquences.

The way I see it all parties are at fault. The government should keep their greedy paws out of it and let nature take is course so to speak. If company gets too big for their britchs and croaks then so be it another one will be along to take its place. If the company and the union both want to survive then they will have to work together to achieve it, and if they can't maybe the next one can. Maybe then more of the stuff we use evryday would be made in the U.S. instead of everyother country but the U.S.

 

[Sigasaurus]

In a perfect world large corperations would not exist, unions would not exist, and I would be able to buy a stanley thermos that is made in america. How ever that is not the case, companies got bigger, greedier and started cutting corners in every aspect. As a result people formed unions for reasons ranging from saftey to retirement. Then the unions got greedy and companies got greedier. As a result companies started moving overseas were they could cut corners and compromise the workers saftey, health and quality of life with little to no coniquences.

The way I see it all parties are at fault. The government should keep their greedy paws out of it and let nature take is course so to speak. If company gets too big for their britchs and croaks then so be it another one will be along to take its place. If the company and the union both want to survive then they will have to work together to achieve it, and if they can't maybe the next one can. Maybe then more of the stuff we use evryday would be made in the U.S. instead of everyother country but the U.S.

Good Take on things. It would be nice if it wasn't a scavenger hunt to find items made in our own country.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Comapnies got "greedy" because share holders demand a return on their investment or they'd take their money somewhere else.

Who are the share holders? Go look in the mirror and you'll see one. Would you invest in a company that only returned 2%, or 1% each year? Would you want a pension that didn't keep up with inflation, or outpace inflation?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Your views rely on individuals doing what is right. In a perfect world all would be good, but it is a fact companies will let their employees live in poverty in the name of profit. This holds true in all aspects of life and government. When companies stop valuing their employees then what options do they have. Your response is quit and find a new job? So what does a 50+ year old man do in this situation?

My views value the individual and their rights over the collective force of the mob. Companies are formed to reward investment, not provide jobs. This entitlement attitude astounds me. Is your employer your keeper? Is the government? Why do you think your employer has any responsibility to you as an individual beyond rewarding your recent work effort?

Yes, my response is quit and find a new job, not use the power of the mob to cooerce.

A 50+ year old man that can't find a new job didn't properly prepare themselves for life at 50+. Who's fault is it that the 50+ year old finds themselves in a situation where they have to beg and accept whatever scraps they are given? Mine? Yours? The employer's? No. None of the above. It is theirs. Solely.

I'm pushing 50, so I'm not some kid just spouting off here. I started my own business many years ago. I sold it and made a pretty good chunk of money. I decided to start another business, and it did OK too. The third one turkeyed. The four and fifth have been very good. Hard work, but good. I continue to reinvent myself. My skills are marketable. Why? Because I have never in my life made it a career goal to be in a cookie cutter position, where I can easily be replaced by someone else. If that 50+ year old has allowed himself to be replacable, why is that the employer's fault?

 

[sbsg2005]

I don't plan on a company provided pension or social security. Over time neither have proven to be reliable. The was I see it if a company wants to grow then they have to save and strive to be that way not just hold their hand out for some investors funds to do it. If they did have to pay investors then they would be able to keep their money within the company providing more capitol for the company to survive on. If they did not have to give the money to investors they could fund their pension funds. If the people would take charge of their own retirement like they should then the companies would .not havw to. This should have been going on the whole time.

Please excuse the spelling and grammer mistakes I am using dumb phone. It likes to think it is smarter than me.

 

[Sigasaurus]

I haven't once said i am entitled to anything. IMO your views reflect that everybody should make minimum wage in the name of huge profits. I am highly skilled and educated and prepared myself quite well for life. You act as if someone should devote their whole life working their ass off to make somebody rich and that it is perfectly fine to leave them high and dry in the name of profits because they get old or slow down a bit. It is this mentality that brought about unions in the first place. A human body is only good for so long and I pray I never have to work for an individual with your views of their employees. I know the saying business has no conscience, but if they treat people like you advocate then they have no future either.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I haven't once said i am entitled to anything. IMO your views reflect that everybody should make minimum wage in the name of huge profits. I am highly skilled and educated and prepared myself quite well for life. You act as if someone should devote their whole life working their ass off to make somebody rich and that it is perfectly fine to leave them high and dry in the name of profits because they get old or slow down a bit. It is this mentality that brought about unions in the first place. A human body is only good for so long and I pray I never have to work for an individual with your views of their employees. I know the saying business has no conscience, but if they treat people like you advocate then they have no future either.

While you claim you haven't said you are entitled to anything your words do not resemble that claim. You should prepare yourself for your life. Complaining that an employer somehow owe you something because of your age is absolutely claiming victimhood entitlement status.

My employees get paid fat, about double the growing rate (along with free meals at work and more perks than you can shake a stick at) because I only hire the best people that are willing to provide their best effort. Mediocracy is unacceptable. I want entrepreneurs, not clock punchers. I make the people around me rich and they make me richer, in whatever way wealth is measured. You don't know the first ******* thing about what I think of my employees. They do what needs to be done and while we have (sometimes heated) debates about what and how we should do things they would NEVER presume to tell me the way it will be. I help them because I choose to; not because they will gang up like thugs and shut me down if I don't. I can only accomplish this because there is not a single entitlement bone in their bodies. Everyone is hired with the intention that they are working to eliminate their position. That's probably not a situation you understand or would be suited for.

 

[Sigasaurus]

While you claim you haven't said you are entitled to anything your words do not resemble that claim. You should prepare yourself for your life. Complaining that an employer somehow owe you something because of your age is absolutely claiming victimhood entitlement status.

My employees get paid fat, about double the growing rate (along with free meals at work and more perks than you can shake a stick at) because I only hire the best people that are willing to provide their best effort. Mediocracy is unacceptable. I want entrepreneurs, not clock punchers. I make the people around me rich and they make me richer, in whatever way wealth is measured. You don't know the first ******* thing about what I think of my employees. They do what needs to be done and while we have (sometimes heated) debates about what and how we should do things they would NEVER presume to tell me the way it will be. I help them because I choose to; not because they will gang up like thugs and shut me down if I don't. I can only accomplish this because there is not a single entitlement bone in their bodies. Everyone is hired with the intention that they are working to eliminate their position. That's probably not a situation you understand or would be suited for.

It seems to anger you when I assume things based on your words yet you act as if I should take your criticisim with a grain of salt. I am not trying to attack your character it just seemed that was your stance from what I had read.Honestly from the sounds of your practices and not your theories an individual such as you and myself could achieve great things. I applaud you and the size of you nuts for going out on a limb and starting numerous companies. I know regardless of the enviroment or status of the economy I have the skill set be sucessful. And if it is like you say an understanding between you and your employees that they are working themselves out of a job then there is no foul play in my eyes. We are comparing apples and oranges in a sense. I am referring to those companies that promote careers as long as an individual is loyal and dedicated and then trap people based on their age or situation. I am not saying this is common, but you can't deny it happens.

 

[actaeon277]

While you claim you haven't said you are entitled to anything your words do not resemble that claim. You should prepare yourself for your life. Complaining that an employer somehow owe you something because of your age is absolutely claiming victimhood entitlement status.

My employees get paid fat, about double the growing rate (along with free meals at work and more perks than you can shake a stick at) because I only hire the best people that are willing to provide their best effort. Mediocracy is unacceptable. I want entrepreneurs, not clock punchers. I make the people around me rich and they make me richer, in whatever way wealth is measured. You don't know the first ******* thing about what I think of my employees. They do what needs to be done and while we have (sometimes heated) debates about what and how we should do things they would NEVER presume to tell me the way it will be. I help them because I choose to; not because they will gang up like thugs and shut me down if I don't. I can only accomplish this because there is not a single entitlement bone in their bodies. Everyone is hired with the intention that they are working to eliminate their position. That's probably not a situation you understand or would be suited for.

That's great. Sounds like you are a good boss.
Here's the bosses I have to deal with: you want overtime - go wash my car
If I tell you to do something and it doesn't work out like I thought - 5 days off unpaid. You made boss look bad.
Don't violate a safety rule. Unless boss says so.
Your foot was amputated. You still have to come in while your stump is bleeding. Don't want our OHSHA recordable to be to high.

There are many others.that being said. I've worked for many good bosses.
I don't need protection from them.

 

[hornadylnl]

My non union shop went from a TRIR in the 40's to consistantly under 10. We usually average 6-8 now. We run roughly 1000+ horsepower in air compressors to power our air tools. We run countless saws, drills, hydraulic, and mechanical equipment.

Why the huge improvement? Did we unionize? No. Did we get new upper management? Yes. Did the new management care about the employees more than the last? No. Why the change in safety? GOOD OLD EVIL GREED. Amazing how profit motive helps everyone. The new management realized its cheaper to be safe than to pay medical bios, workmans comp, etc.

 

[deadeye]

Sure lower pay and longer hours sound great, who needs benefits.

I do not work for a union however i do believe it will have a direct effect on everyone. Government needs to stay out of private buissness. Ditch Mitch, hasnt he sold us out enough.

 

[dross]

Comapnies got "greedy" because share holders demand a return on their investment or they'd take their money somewhere else.

Who are the share holders? Go look in the mirror and you'll see one. Would you invest in a company that only returned 2%, or 1% each year? Would you want a pension that didn't keep up with inflation, or outpace inflation?

Of course not. You want to find the guy with the most cutthroat captialist attitude towards their own money? Look for the guy always telling everyone else what they should do with theirs. Never fails.

Ask the next guy who talks about greed if they've ever sold their house and made money after just a few years in excess of the improvements they put in it. Suddenly they're experts on the nuances of market-based pricing.

Greed is what the other guy is about. I'm just being reasonable with my money.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

It seems to anger you when I assume things based on your words yet you act as if I should take your criticisim with a grain of salt. I am not trying to attack your character it just seemed that was your stance from what I had read.Honestly from the sounds of your practices and not your theories an individual such as you and myself could achieve great things. I applaud you and the size of you nuts for going out on a limb and starting numerous companies. I know regardless of the enviroment or status of the economy I have the skill set be sucessful. And if it is like you say an understanding between you and your employees that they are working themselves out of a job then there is no foul play in my eyes. We are comparing apples and oranges in a sense. I am referring to those companies that promote careers as long as an individual is loyal and dedicated and then trap people based on their age or situation. I am not saying this is common, but you can't deny it happens.

This is the Interwebz. Nothing angers me. It's my happy place.

My theory is pretty simple.

I want to make money.

I find somewhere to invest what I have to make my money grow.

I don't really care how it grows. I'd like to not go to jail or read my name in the paper associated with slave labor in Malaysia, but that's kind of about it.

You have a business and convince me I'll make money if I give you some.

I say OK and give you my money. You take that money and do something, and make me happy because I am making money.

You want to expand your business and ask me for more money. I say OK, because you've done a good job for me so far.

You go hire some people to do things that you can't do yourself because there is too much to do, you aren't good at it, or for whatever reason. I don't necessarily get involved in your decisions. I just want my money.

You don't give me my money. Now all hell is going to break loose. I don't give you any more money to grow. I also want all my money back now. Your business is in trouble.

Or you do keep making me money, but someone else convinces me I can make more if I give it to them instead of you. The result is the same as above.

In order to stay competitive with your product you have to have equal or less cost, or greater margins, or both, of your product.

Sometimes you have to adjust your work force and compensation in order to keep attracting the capital necessary to survive.

Workers aren't invested in the company through their work product. They generate value, and are compensated for that value.

Workers are not slaves and have a right to take their work effort wherever and give it to whomever they choose for any or no reason.

If a worker cannot generate a work product that is desirable to other businesses it is no one's fault except the worker.

Everything else is crap.

I treat my employees great, but I have an all-star team, and I do what I want to because I would rather keep the team together. A couple of them have been with me through four different startups. I am atypical. I incubate companies, and I am the sole investor.

I don't get wrapped up in corporate politics because I don't like them. The way you would operate a larger organization is necessarily more rigid. But I understand the purpose of business is to reward investment.

 

[Martin Draco]

Why are the unions worried? If being a member of the Union is soooo great and in the people's best interest, everybody will want to join!!

 

[Lex Concord]

Your views rely on individuals doing what is right. In a perfect world all would be good, but it is a fact companies will let their employees live in poverty in the name of profit. This holds true in all aspects of life and government. When companies stop valuing their employees then what options do they have. Your response is quit and find a new job? So what does a 50+ year old man do in this situation?

Actually, his view relies on people following human interest and acting in their own best interest. If the employee is truly valued, the employer will be likely to pay more or give more benefits in order to retain his services. If the employee is not valuable, he will likely be let go once he can be replaced...unless, of course, he has a union protecting his low-value or valueless "contributions".

Unless by "valued employee" we're discussing someone who merely has a lot of time with the company.

Regarding what a 50+ year old man do in such a situation, why should that be anyone's concern other than his own? Is he owed a job, or should he earn a job based on his skills and experience?

I know a man in his late 60s or early 70s who got on early last year at our company...I heard him away from the work area last week on what sounded like a call to set up an interview.

What should a 50+ year old man do? Same thing this guy did...invest in himself and maintain, increase, and sharpen his skills, rather than count on a job as an entitlement.